Future Posting Gaps & Budapest

Today I'm leaving for Eastern Europe for a week and a half. Hopefully I'll be able to post but as a precursor I wanted to post a link to 'Dodo' and his review of the tram system over at the European Tribune. There are some great pictures as well.

This summer, Budapest put new trams in service on the world's busiest tram line, trams from the Siemens Combino family that are the world's longest trams for passengers:

For me as a railfan, trams and tramways were too ordinary and everyday sights, and never considered them 'proper' railway. So I was astonished to discover that trams have plenty of afficiados among Western railfans. What's more, it turned out my (former) home city Budapest was an eldorado for them: an extensive network even after four decades of closures, lots of different tram types, lots of older types in regular traffic.

So, I thought trams deserve Train Blogging coverage, and took the occasion of the arrival of the Combinos to remedy my long dismissal by reading up on tramways, and present their development via the trams of Budapest. But when the Combinos had big technical difficulties, I delayed posting. Now I do it with a lager picture selection.

Breaking Development in the Transit Space Race

Something big happened today. The Utah transit authority and the FTA signed an agreement that would allow the federal government to pay for 20% of Salt Lake Cities 5 line rail expansion. I'm not quite sure yet who got the better deal, but I think it was the Utah Transit Authority. According to the Deseret News:

UTA general manager John Inglish said the letter of intent, known as a memorandum of understanding, was an unprecedented agreement between a state agency and the Federal Transit Administration. Normally, transit agencies approach the federal government for funding on projects one-by-one, not as a package deal, he said.

Because the letter of intent applies to all five projects, Inglish said his agency will save what would have been years of waiting through a lengthy federal funding process.

So instead of going through the New Starts process while waiting for the FTA to reject their projects or cause cost inflation and change station locations to fit the ridership model which favors bus projects, they can actually plan to come in under budget and on time and with the projects the voters wanted. The memorandum of understanding states that UTA will fund two light rail lines and a commuter line on it's own while the FTA pays for 80% of two other light rail lines.

Ever since the New Starts program started, the federal share has been dwindling for fixed guideway projects. Starting out on the same footing as highways, federal funding began at 80% of the project cost but has since dwindled to 50% with a 10 year waiting period. While 20% overall might be a little low, the signing of the document today by the UTA has opened up options for cities that want to get into the transit space race. Cities that have been able to raise local money yet have a master plan to build a transit system. This fits into one of the reasons why I started this blog, which is to document the transit space race.

This might be a good model for cities that are just now looking to build light rail networks or who might want to get back into the hunt. Now it should be said that in keeping up with Denver and Portland, Salt Lake City had a referendum to raise their sales tax to fund their rail extensions. I know there have been a few thoughts that this might be happening but UTA was traveling under the radar until this announcement. Other cities might take notice and see this as an opportunity to make a deal with the FTA. Minneapolis is looking to build 3 more LRT lines, Tampa just announced a new rail plan and Birmingham is starting to think about it.

Houston tried to do this a few years ago but the idea got blocked by former Rep Tom Delay and John Culbertson. They asked that the FTA fund the first two rail lines while they built the next two locally. They were asking for 50% of the total and before that they were trying to use the main street line as a match. Because they couldn't get it through though, they had to downgrade some lines to BRT.

As I said before, this is a pretty big deal. It might signal a big change in how transit expansion is going to get funded. Hopefully it moves back up from 20% and perhaps the death of the process that has caused so many problems by taking quick decision making away from local jurisdictions.

South End Moving Up

In Charlotte, TOD has been sprouting like weeds. It must make the faux libertarians mad that their pet cause isn't getting all the money, and doesn't produce the changes that everyone else wants. Today there was an article in the Observer documenting the growth in the south end of Charlotte:

"There has been an increased interest in South End within the last two years," said Tim Manes, planning coordinator with the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Planning Commission. "We are starting to see more projects in the preliminary design stage, rezoning stage and even formal transit-oriented development approval stage.

"Light rail is definitely one of the major draws for new projects, said Ryan Willis, principal for Boxwood, a realty company that represents the new Park Avenue Plaza project and also has a project in the NoDa arts district north of uptown.Park Avenue Plaza, a four-story condominium building under construction on Park Avenue, will have 39 residential units built around a boutique hotel-style atrium.

It also will have four commercial spaces at street level and a parking garage.The developer was initially interested in that site because CATS planned a light rail stop at Park Avenue, though that stop was eventually deleted from plans, Willis said. There's still a stop at Bland Street, though, about 500 feet north of the property, he said.

And I guess its a bit of a competition between two parts of town.

"In the past two years, what I've seen is that the South End is growing faster than the NoDa area," he said. "It's almost like they're competing for the title of the arts area."

Both NoDa and South End have monthly gallery crawls. Other galleries in the South End include the Charlotte Art League, Elder Gallery, Chasen Galleries, and Hidell Brooks Gallery.

Newell doesn't see the comparison between NoDa and South End. Merrifield Partners markets toward engineers, architects and designers who want to live and work in the same area. NoDa tends to draw artists.

"It's a whole different animal than NoDa. It's just a different market. It's different buildings, more amenities, better transit," he said. "A lot of those things contribute to South End."

That's right, better transit and better access means more development and higher land values. I sure wish they would have built a freeway on that rail line. Instead of an 11 story building, we could have 11 one story buildings. Wouldn't that be swell.

How To Hate Light Rail in Houston

Apparently there is a recipe in Houston for anti-rail arguments. Go to any Houston anti-rail site and there is a clearly a template for bashing rail lines. I can see the book now, steps for being against rail in Houston. I noticed some of the many steps in a recent editorial in the Houston Chronicle.

Step 1: Claim the Light Rail Blocks Traffic and Hogs the Road.

Though the light-rail trains don't often sit still to clog streets, the right-of-way hogs do stifle traffic through downtown and Midtown each day. If the leaders of the Metropolitan Transit Authority have their way, Richmond Avenue will also soon be nearly impassable during rush hours.

Remind me again how many people those LRVs carry versus cars? So who should have priority, a train full of people, or a single occupancy vehicle? Increasing the capacity of Main Street seems to be rather beneficial. The line does get 40,000 riders a day.

Step 2: Transit should be a private enterprise, since cars always pay for themselves.

The New York Times, which so often whiffs at attempts to explain Houston to the nation, highlighted the downtown tunnel system recently in a feature story that illustrates how the city works best.

"(The tunnel system) was not centrally planned; it just grew," wrote Houston-based reporter Ralph Blumenthal. "And, befitting Texans' distrust of government, most of it is private."

Rule 3: Cite Joel Kotkin or Wendell Cox or RandalL O'Toole as Experts

Light rail and bike paths are but two examples of the current push to shape Houston in the vision of urban planners and civic leaders who hate Houston's now 171-year tradition of organic growth. A debate on such matters has been carried out in this newspaper since urban expert Joel Kotkin told the Greater Houston Partnership early this summer that Houston's embrace of free-market planning was a great example for other cities.

Outsiders like Kotkin seem to have a pretty good view of Houston's workings these days, perhaps even better than its residents.

It always cracks me up that there is no mention of where these guys come from or their motives, just that they are experts. But most people know who these guys are by now.

Rule 4: Houston's Lack of Planning Make it the Greatest City in the USA

Indeed, like the tunnels, Houston wasn't planned so much as it just grew into the nation's fourth-largest city. Now, many would like to see Houston turn its back on the very strategy — that is, nonstrategy — that made the city great.

Rule 5: The Public Process is Flawed Because We the Minority Aren't Getting Our Way

Alas resistance, as they say, is futile. Metro recently held public hearings that allowed opponents of the Richmond rail route to voice their dissent. But surely all those attending the meeting know any words of discord fell on deaf ears.

Seemingly nothing can be said that will convince Metro's leaders of anything other than the plan they're forcing on Houston. Those who live and operate businesses along Richmond are told to sacrifice for the "greater good."

I believe over 50% voted for the Metro Solutions light rail plan and most people on Richmond want the rail line. The stats that come from Culbertson's head are just that, in his head.

Rule 6: If It Doesn't Serve Suburban Commuters, It Doesn't Serve Anyone Worth Serving

Never mind that the light rail can't get commuters from the suburbs to their jobs. Or that Houston's decentralized population and wide geographic reach vastly reduce the utility of a static mass transit structure.

Of course they are probably fine with the HOV lane road warrior bus system they created. People in Houston working along the major freeways have an option with those HOV lanes built with federal funding. Very few people realize that Houston has already spent at least a billion dollars on those spokes. Yet even with those improvements, there was still a need for a crazy expansion of the Katy Freeway, which no one complains about going over budget.

Rule 7: Call the Rail Line a Name

I know the guy in this article wanted to call the Houston light rail by a name, perhaps danger train or something silly like that, but he had to look credible right?

So take a look at all of these elements of a rail attack piece, does it look like every other attack piece ever done? Of course it does because deep down they just do not like rail and can not just come out and say it. All they have to do is say "I don't like rail". This is not a war of ideas but one of ideology. It's like a virus that has spread from Karl Rove's brain to every aspect of life.

If you have another step, feel free to post it in the comments.

Land Use, Land Use, Land Use

We've known for a while now that it isn't just the transportation that matters, it's also the land use it serves. And new research from Smart Growth America is another rather compelling argument for it. It basically states that compact development is key to reducing auto dependence and the effects of climate change. This report also uses the expertise of Jerry Walters at Fehr & Peers who with his colleagues there has come up with the direct ridership model which does a better job at predicting ridership based on different access to the stations such as bikes, buses, and walking based on the land uses and the surrounding grid. Previous studies referenced in this report state that there is a 35% reduction in driving from compact development.

The 1994 Portland Metro Travel Survey stated that people who live in mixed use communities with good transit take about 9.8 VMT per capita versus 21.7 VMT per capita. That's rather impressive and shows that increases in transportation and land use measures would benefit cities who are looking to reduce VMT. This finding was used to show that the over 7,000 housing units built on the streetcar line downtown in walkable, transit oriented neighborhoods, would reduce VMT by 31 million a year. If we say that a gallon of gas is 20 pounds of carbon, then we would reduce carbon emissions by 24.8 million pounds if fuel economy is 25 mpg which is being really generous.

More transit options, more compact development, reduced VMT.

Play Consumer Consequences

Here is a game put forth by American Public Media. If you don't want to feel bad about your lifestyle, don't take it. I'm pretty sure everyone unless you starve yourselves or live next to work is going to need more than one earth to sustain your lifestyle. Apparently I'm bad because my daily trip to work on the train is long (12 miles each way) even though i drive my car maybe once a week. I can't imagine how many earths someone uses that drives their car from nowheresville to work every day.

And They're Back in the Game

Mr. Setty and Demery have put the PublicTransit.us site back up. Finally we can get our hands on all of those passenger density reports they've done. Check it out as its a good amount of material to take in.

We Need Subways, But How Will We Pay For Them?

Los Angeles
Now here's an idea, lets pay for transit lines like we used to, tie them to real estate. Obviously this isn't a way to pay for the whole line (unless zoning was lifted and there was a development free for all) but it should be considered for partial funding. It's possible that a development fund could be put together to fund stations, or private developers could bid to build high rises with the stations. I'm sure there are a lot of other innovative ways to create a TIF district. Maybe there could be a roof tax for every new unit along the line. Anyone have any innovative ideas for funding transit?

San Francisco
Speaking of subway dreams, Polk Street Blog reminds everyone that there will be a BRT planning session for Van Ness in San Francisco. I'm kind of upset that I'm going to miss it because I would have gone and raised some issues with the BRT scheme. This is one of the lines that I think should be a Subway and for two reasons(they both might fit into the same reason):

A. Van Ness is the main through street to get from 101 South to the Golden Gate Bridge. The street is already crowded and on many days traffic does not move an inch. I'm not asking for a freeway because that would be a dumb idea (one that almost happened). But taking away two lanes on the busiest North-South street in town for buses that will still get caught in cross traffic every block? Could ITS realistically keep up with that? There are 31 crossings from Fort Mason and Market street which is only 2 miles.

B. I want to get to the other side of the city in less than 45 minutes and I don't think that is possible on the surface streets. By other side of the city I mean 3 miles between my house(white dot) and the bar where I watch UT play football(Orange Dot) and my friends Mark and Ade live(Orange Circle). It's like I have to plan a day just to see them without driving my car. Taking the J to the 47/49 is a fun bumpy people watching experience, but I imagine I could cut this trip to 25 minutes with a subway which would make it about the same convenience as my car (more so because I don't have to park).

So zone up Van Ness and do it with TIF districts. Make the Van Ness/Geary/Subway to the Sea a state TIF project to see if it works. If it doesn't work as well as it should, well these are good projects that should be funded anyways, if it does work, it can act as a model for cities around the country who might want to build a subway line or extension.

I've made this map before but just so people can see what I'm talking about check out the map below. The blue line is BART, the Red lines are existing MUNI Metro lines. The red dashed lines are planned rail extensions and the yellow dashed lines are subway projects I wish would happen so I can eat dim sum on Geary or watch the UT games on Union without spending 2 hours on the bus and J.

Ridership on the largest bus lines in SF is in this article.

An Inconvenient Acronym

There were a few notes on the internets about the South Lake Union Streetcar. Apparently it was almost called the South Lake Union Trolley. You can put the letters together. Diamajin thinks it will boost popularity. I can see that, especially from kids who think its kinda funny. Some are worried that the neighborhood is losing the SLU moniker. Well with an acronym like this, it will never go away.

Tailgating & Transit Don't Mix

Why is this not a surprise? Tailgating apparently is ranked by the amount of parking available which of course is limited in transit oriented cities. Even in the most transit oriented city, a recent uproar has been caused in the Bronx over the cost of parking for the new Yankee Stadium. Makes sense, but when it causes a city to lose a bid for my favorite sports event every 4 years it gets personal. I know this is old news, but when I saw the post at Transit Miami, it kind of poured some salt in an old wound.

San Francisco will abandon its bid to bring the 2016 Olympics here in the wake of the 49ers' announcement that the team no longer plans to build a new stadium in the city, the group leading the Olympic effort announced today.

Scott Givens, managing director of San Francisco's bid, said last week's surprise announcement regarding the stadium -- until then a central part of the group's San Francisco Olympic bid -- irreparably damaged the city's reputation with the U.S. Olympic Committee.

The reason for the drop? The cost of a light rail extension from the T line and the lack of tailgating!

The team's largest objection to the San Francisco site, they said, was the high cost of bringing transit and parking infrastructure to the Point. York also cited the loss of traditional parking lots, saying tailgating would not be an option for fans if the stadium was located in San Francisco.

I sometimes wonder if San Francisco is really transit first, if one of its most beloved institutions, the 49ers are so beholden to the car. At least you'll be able to get to AT&T park on a PCC at some point in the future. But I won't be going to watch the 5k.